Toward Agricultural Intersectionality? Farm Intergenerational Transfer at the Fringe. A Comparative Analysis of the Urban-Influenced Ontario's ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
published: 11 January 2022
doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2021.759638
Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
Farm Intergenerational Transfer at
the Fringe. A Comparative Analysis
of the Urban-Influenced Ontario’s
Greenbelt, Canada and Toulouse
InterSCoT, France
Mikaël Akimowicz 1*, Karen Landman 2 , Charilaos Képhaliacos 3 and Harry Cummings 2
1
LEREPS, Université Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées/IEP Toulouse/Université Toulouse III – Paul Sabatier, Toulouse,
France, 2 SEDRD, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, 3 LEREPS, Université Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées/IEP
Toulouse/ENSFEA, Toulouse, France
Peri-urban agriculture can foster the resilience of metropolitan areas through the provision
of local food and other multifunctional agricultural amenities and externalities. However,
in peri-urban areas, farming is characterized by strong social uncertainties, which slow
Edited by:
the intergenerational transfer of farm operations. In this article, we tackle the beliefs that
Christopher Fullerton,
Brock University, Canada underlie farmers’ decision-making to identify planning opportunities that may support
Reviewed by: farm intergenerational transfers. The design of an institutionalist conceptual framework
Donald C. Cole, based on Keynesian uncertainty and Commonsian Futurity aims to analyze farmers’
University of Toronto, Canada
Philip Walsh,
beliefs associated with farm intergenerational transfer dynamics. The dataset of this
Ryerson University, Canada comparative analysis includes 41 interviews with farmers involved in animal, cash-crop,
*Correspondence: and horticulture farming in the urban-influenced Ontario’s Greenbelt, Canada, and
Mikaël Akimowicz
Toulouse InterSCoT, France, during which farmers designed a mental model of their
mikael.akimowicz@univ-tlse3.fr
investment decision-making. The results highlight the dominance of a capital-intensive
Specialty section: farm model framed by a money-land-market nexus that slows farm structural change.
This article was submitted to
The subsequent access inequalities, which are based on characteristics of farmers and
Land, Livelihoods and Food Security,
a section of the journal their farm projects, support the idea of the existence of an agricultural intersectionality.
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems The results also highlight the positive role of the institutional context; when farmers’ beliefs
Received: 16 August 2021 are well-aligned with the beliefs that shape their institutional environment, the frictions
Accepted: 06 December 2021
Published: 11 January 2022
that slow farm structural change in peri-urban areas are moderated by a shared vision of
Citation:
the future.
Akimowicz M, Landman K, Keywords: farm transfer, peri-urban agriculture, farmers’ beliefs, Keynesian uncertainty, Commonsian Futurity,
Képhaliacos C and Cummings H agricultural intersectionality
(2022) Toward Agricultural
Intersectionality? Farm
Intergenerational Transfer at the
Fringe. A Comparative Analysis of the
INTRODUCTION
Urban-Influenced Ontario’s Greenbelt,
Canada and Toulouse InterSCoT,
The current COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the severe structural inequalities of the
France. global food system. The exacerbation of the criticality of local food provision has resulted in
Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 5:759638. renewed interests in food access issues and food chain resilience (Hobbs, 2020; Lioutas and
doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2021.759638 Charatsari, 2021; Thilmany et al., 2021). In particular, the interest of city planners in peri-urban
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 1 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
agriculture (Cadieux et al., 2013), as testified by the design of control beliefs associated with farmers’ perceived behavioral
place-based/territorialized agricultural policies (Bonnefoy and control. Following Peirce’s pragmatism, beliefs can be defined as
Brand, 2014; Bissardon and Boulianne, 2016), the activity of “something that we are aware of; (. . . ) appeases the irritation of
municipal governments on land markets (Jarrige, 2018; Perrin doubt; (. . . ) involves the establishment in our nature of a rule of
and Nougarèdes, 2020), and the formation of networks to support action, or, say for short a habit” (Peirce, 1931–1958, p. 5397). This
urban-influenced agriculture (e.g., Cities for Agroecology stance is a foundation for the field of institutional economics,
Network, Eurocities, Organic Cities), has been strengthened: which posits the social embeddedness of economic decisions.
peri-urban agriculture is commonly perceived as a lever for Interestingly, the overlap of Morais et al. (2017) three types of
designing more sustainable metropolitan areas (Sroka et al., beliefs with Scott’s (1995) three dimensions of institutions-i.e.,
2021). In a context where the proximity to urban markets results cognitive, normative, and regulatory-supports the relevance of
in new opportunities and constraints for peri-urban farmers, adopting an institutionalist stance for this research.
who have developed original peri-urban farming systems that The indeterminacy of belief-based actions contributes to
are quite specific from a production point of view (Duvernoy an updating of beliefs-i.e., confirmation or revision-once one
et al., 2018; Akimowicz et al., 2020), planning activities may experiences the outcomes of an action. However, the decision
substantially influence farming activities (Butt and Taylor, 2018; to take over a farm is a situation that is unlikely to be repeated;
Buchan et al., 2019). in most cases, this is a once-in-a-lifetime decision that implies a
In the medium term, food provisioning for metropolitan areas career-long commitment. From this perspective, the mechanism
is threatened by farm exit. While the number of farms currently through which habits are forged has not taken place yet. In
tends to increase in the Global South, the situation is quite addition to the singularity of the decision to start farming, the
different in the Global North where the number of farms has peri-urban farming environment is highly uncertain (Bryant and
been almost continuously decreasing since the end of World Johnston, 1992; Darly and Torre, 2013). Yet, new farmers are not
War II (Lowder et al., 2021). In Canada and France, two Global independent agents who permanently optimize their decisions.
North countries, farm exit was confirmed between the last farm Their decisions are framed, instead, by beliefs resulting from their
censuses, with a number of farms down by 6% between 2011 social embeddedness in place, which involves other territorial
and 2016 in Canada (Ministry of Industry, 2017) and by 2% actors such as other farmers, collective organizations such as
between 2010 and 2016 in France (Agreste, 2020). Paralleling cooperatives, and public agencies (Akimowicz and Képhaliacos,
farm exit, one can also note a consolidation of farm size with 2018; Diendéré et al., 2018; Perrin and Nougarèdes, 2020).
an average increase of +16 ha in Canada and +7 ha in France Therefore, understanding the beliefs that shape both new farmers’
during the same time periods. In these two countries, the loss decisions to start farming and retiring farmers’ decisions to
of farm operators, −7% in both cases, and their aging, 55% of transfer their farm can contribute to better policies supporting
farmers were 55 years old or older in Canada while 25% were 60 farm intergenerational transfers. In this article, we explore the
years old or older in France both in 2016, raises the issue of farm beliefs associated with the event of farm transfer to elicit the
intergenerational transfer. articulation of farmers’ beliefs.
Farm transfer is indeed a key step for farm trajectories. The originality of this paper is fourfold. First, it relies on a
For instance, the likelihood of transferring farms to identified comparative approach. The survey is conducted in two countries,
successors contributes to maintaining farm-investment dynamics in Ontario’s Greenbelt in Canada and in the Toulouse InterSCoT
that foster the viability of agricultural systems (Akimowicz et al., in France; farm succession is currently a critical issue in both
2013; Gasselin et al., 2014; Valliant et al., 2019). Interestingly, landscapes. Second, this research relies on a field investigation
peri-urban agriculture also demonstrates specificities during the with farmers on their beliefs and habits. The data collection
turning point of farm succession and take-over. Inwood and is based on mental modeling which framed a simultaneous
Sharp (2012) showed that, in an environment where farmland semi-structured interview that elicited farmers’ beliefs about
access is conflictual and rather constrained, farmers’ adaptation farm transfer; this allowed for follow-up questions specific to
strategies do not rely solely on land expansion but also on vertical each interviewee’s farm trajectory. Third, the purposive sample
growth that involves food processing and marketing. Bertoni includes farmers from a wide range of ages, which allows
and Cavicchioli (2016) further noted that a farm’s proximity to for differentiation between new farmers with a recent farm
urban labor markets in more densely populated areas fosters the takeover experience and experienced farmers with a growing
transmission of horticultural farms due to better returns for farm concern for transferring their farm. Last but not least, this
work as well as the possibility to diversify income sources through work relies on a conceptual framework, centered on farmers’
off-farm work. beliefs, that attempts to build on Keynesian social uncertainty
While farm takeover can be considered as an investment and Commonsian Futurity, which both frame social actors’
based on some rational mental computing (Jorgenson, 1967; decisions; this is an attempt to explore the proximity of these
Barry et al., 1995), it can also be interpreted as an intentional two theoretical stances which may gain depth and consistency
action based on reasons particular to the decision maker, such as from the field of psychology. The following section explores the
their beliefs. Morais et al. (2017) identified three types of beliefs economic literature to theoretically ground this analysis of farm
that influence farmers’ decision-making when planning farm intergenerational transfer in the field of institutional economics,
takeover: behavioral beliefs associated with farmers’ attitudes, which emphasizes the social embeddedness of farmers’ economic
normative beliefs associated with farmers’ perceived norms, and decision-making while allowing intentional decisions to depart
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 2 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
from an internalized pre-existing belief system. The method and additional sources of uncertainty complicate farmers’
data presents the mental mapping method and the original data decision-making. Temporary land tenure with short leases
collected for this research. The results are detailed in the results are commonly implemented due to urbanization (Léger-
section which highlights the singularity of peri-urban farming Bosch, 2019). Agricultural practices may be regulated to solve
styles, which are framed, on the one hand, by farmers’ intentional potential conflicts with non-farming nearby residents (Owen
values and quality of life choices while being constrained, on the et al., 2000). Land use zoning may be revised to allow for
other hand, by the organization of both the food supply chain the development of farmland (Jongeneel et al., 2008). As a
and the territory/place within which they are embedded. This result, the uncertainty characterizing the decision to start
double embeddedness frames an intersectional environment. farming in peri-urban areas is significantly different from other
The existence of a land-money-market nexus drives access uncertainties in rural areas; in addition to biological, climate,
constraints, which hinders farm transmission and slows farm and agricultural price uncertainties, peri-urban farmers also
structural change. In the discussion of this paper, a discussion of face land access and political uncertainties. These additional
the results is provided before concluding the article. sources of social uncertainty may widen the gap between
researchers’ theoretical deductions (e.g., economic models of
LITERATURE REVIEW farmers’ decisions, economic forecasts, normative prescriptions)
and field observations of farmers’ planning decisions due to an
This literature review aims to present the hypotheses of this inappropriate conceptualization of time, which does not consider
research. We rely on a model of decision-making that is fully farmers’ anticipations on which investment decisions rely
framed by Keynes’ concept of uncertainty, which considers the (Viaggi et al., 2011). In particular, a set of external constraints
psychological dimension of economic decision-makers, as well resulting from the institutional environment within which
as Commons’ concept of Futurity, which provides an adequate farmers are embedded appears to inhibit their capacity to engage
framework for discussing the rationality that animates farmers’ proactively in transformative decision-making (Del Corso et al.,
decision-making. This tentative theoretical reconciliation, which 2015; Akimowicz et al., 2020).
aligns consistently with previous research based on the theory of Hypothesis 1: The high level of uncertainty surrounding the
planned behavior, is a first step toward further connections. decision to start farming slows the intergenerational transfer of
farm operations in peri-urban areas.
Navigating Uncertainty
In Patrick and Eisgruber’s (1968) behavioral theory of the
farm firm, farmers’ behaviors are driven by the pursuit of Making Intentional Decisions
personal goals; farmers specify alternatives to achieve goals and For farmers, navigating the uncertainties of peri-urban
allocate resources according to selected alternatives. However, environments implies, therefore, that decision-making is
internal and external factors that are out of decision-makers’ based on anticipation of the future outcomes of decisions made
control may disrupt this planning. The economic literature in the present-a.k.a, planning. In the field of economics, J.R.
often refers to these factors through the concepts of risk and Commons’ (1934) concept of Futurity grasps the intentionality
uncertainty. Nowadays, several sources of stress can trigger risks of farmers’ decisions well. As Commons’ (1934: 84) puts it,
and uncertainties for farmers, especially if they venture into more “man lives in the future and acts in the present,” which implies
sustainable ways of farming, as they see it, as “a response to that farmers’ decision-making is based on anticipations and
broader agribusiness trends” in line with “their beliefs about forecasting while being fallible. Commons coined the concept of
ecological health and valuing of resilience” (Bondy and Cole, Futurity to characterize this proactive behavior that considers
2019, p. 115). Indeed, Chavas et al. (2010) accentuated the need “the future time of waiting, risking, purpose, and planning”
for better distinguishing these two concepts in economic analyses (ibid. 389). For Commons, decisions are the result of the tension
applied to agriculture. For Knight (1921, p. 20), risk characterizes between two forces: a first force that drives farmers to shape
a situation in which the outcome of future events can be their future through exploration and innovation and a second
calculated (measurable risk) whereas uncertainty characterizes a force that makes farmers conform to socially constructed and
situation in which outcomes cannot be calculated (unmeasurable internalized frameworks (Atkinson, 2009). The latter force
uncertainty). Additionally, for Keynes (1921), radical uncertainty results from a socialization process that provides farmers with
results from the unpredictable behaviors of emotional agents: a form of background knowledge that enables them to navigate
each anticipated outcome can be assimilated as a bet where the uncertainties of the world (Berger and Luckmann, 1966).
uncertainty is reflected by the degree of credibility of the As such, farmers’ interactions with peer farmers, extension
anticipated outcome. services personnel, other agricultural stakeholders such as
Farming is, generally speaking, subject to multiple sources representatives of cooperatives and agricultural suppliers, or
of uncertainty due to the unpredictability of adverse climatic even with consumers and local residents, all contribute to the
events, price variations on the global market, and unforeseeable formation of farmers’ beliefs and attitudes (Morgan, 2011;
biological processes, which are all complex phenomena. For Labarthe and Laurent, 2013; Darnhofer et al., 2016).
instance, Chavas (1994, 2008) analyzed farm production In uncertain environments, farmers rely on imperfect models
decisions under uncertainty with the introduction of temporal that help them navigate the complexities of their environment
price uncertainty and climatic events. In peri-urban areas, (Billaudot, 2009; Gislain, 2017). These models, which result from
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 3 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
both inherited tacit knowledge internalized during early life significantly different from traditional farms that are typical
stages as well as knowledge accumulated with past experiences of the dominant extractive farming model (Allaire and Boyer,
that contribute to critical learning, are the foundations for 1995; Ngo and Brklacich, 2014). Indeed, following Taylor et al.
decisions that consider decision-makers’ emotions (Padua, 2015). (2017), planning aims to define a balance between agricultural,
Although often imperfect, these models provide farmers with environmental, and amenity values. The high technicality of
critical information that can be used as such or transposed to new planning often results in the perception that planning is a neutral
encountered situations that require creative solutions (Bromley, process (Buchan et al., 2019) whereas Butt and Taylor (2018, p.
2008). These imperfect models help decision-makers to make 2) argue against the perception that planning is a “de-politicized
sense of their environment. In our case, they empower farmers to managerial and technical project.”
make decisions even though they may be inaccurate. This critical
Hypothesis 3: Due to farmers’ embeddedness in an institutional
knowledge refers to Peirce’s (1931–1958) beliefs that overcome
environment, the alignment of farmer’s and territorial actors’
the doubt triggered by uncertainty when making decisions. In
visions of the future may contribute to smoothing farm transfer.
summary, farmers’ investment decisions are intentional, prone to
trial and error, and socially constructed.
Hypothesis 2: Farmers rely on beliefs that enable them to
METHOD AND DATA
anticipate the future outcomes of present decisions to decide to In this section, we detail the comparative method used to analyze
take over or transfer farm operations. farmers’ beliefs about farm transfer, which relies on the interview
of 41 farmers between 2015 and 2017 in two peri-urban areas
The Supporting Role of Territorial in Canada and France, the design of the cognitive models of
Organizations their investment decision-making, the transcription of the semi-
In Keynes’ decision-making process under uncertainty, decisions structured interviews, and the responses to a questionnaire about
are influenced by the amount of information collected, agents’ their farm system.
cognitive capacities, agents’ experience with the issue at stake,
and, last but not least, agents’ social embeddedness (Postel, 2008). Method
More specifically, in urban-influenced areas, farmers interact Dominant in the economic literature is the assumption that
with other farmers, traditional farming organizations, and urban economic agents behave rationally through the optimization
actors such as non-farming residents and urban planners. The of utility (Stigler, 1950), even though the limitations of such
diversity of worldviews is, unsurprisingly, a potential source a stance have long been highlighted (Veblen, 1909). Outside
of conflicts, which can be solved through the formulation of economics, considering both one’s fallible anticipation of
of common projects framed by shared visions of the future outcomes as the root cause of one’s decision-making as well
(Akimowicz et al., 2020). Therefore, a mesoeconomic approach, as one’s embeddedness in a social context is not unusual.
which takes into account the integration of farmers’ activities In psychology, for instance, the theory of planned behavior
into both their territory-understood as place, where coordination stipulates that one’s intentions are framed by three types of
is mostly achieved in the political sphere-and the food supply beliefs about behaviors, norms, and controls, thereby linking
chain-understood as market organizations, where coordination is one’s beliefs to one’s behavior (Ajzen, 1991). This theory has since
mostly achieved in the market sphere (Théret, 1994; Rastoin and been used in economics; Howley et al. (2015) used this theory to
Ghersi, 2010; Rocamora-Montiel et al., 2014), provides the right demonstrate farmers’ economically ‘irrational’ land use decision-
scale for such an investigation. For new farmers, the challenge of making. In a similar manner, van Dijk et al. (2016) used the
being situated in such interpretive communities is to solve the theory to highlight that non-subsidized environmental practices
tensions that arise from the diverging goals that drive the actions may nonetheless be implemented if in line with farmers’ self-
of different stakeholders (Bromley, 2008). identity while being supported, for instance, by cooperatives. As
The process of planning can either foster or hinder such mentioned earlier, the theory was also used by Morais et al. (2017)
an alignment, and therefore underlies either synergies or to analyze farm takeover in Brazil.
conflicts among local farmland stakeholders (e.g., farmers, These results confirm our intention to frame our analysis
environmentalists, developers, decision-makers, local residents). with an institutionalist perspective that posits the idiosyncrasy
Although a multifunctional peri-urban agriculture can of farmers’ decision-making (Wilber and Harrison, 1978). The
contribute to the sustainability of metropolitan areas (Torres- singularity of farmers’ decision-making results from, on the one
Lima et al., 2010), Marsden and Sonnino (2008) noted that hand, internalized decision rules that structure farmers’ thinking
ambiguous formal governance structures have hindered and, on the other hand, a capacity to deviate from these rules
the development of a multifunctional farming sector; Benis to respond to ad hoc situations and goals. In short, farmers act
and Ferrão (2018) observed that urban planning strategies on their own volition, acting purposefully to meet particular
and policies have long missed the integration of peri- ends (Bromley, 2008). This perspective, which mixes both micro
urban agriculture. The definition of what is acceptable may and macro dynamics, refers to Commons’ holindividualism
“accommodate alternatives to hegemonic systems” (Butt and (Chavance, 2012), which has been used for agricultural research
Taylor, 2018, p. 11), which may, in turn, facilitate the inclusion on farm decisions (Léger-Bosch et al., 2020; Halewood et al.,
of alternative place-based peri-urban farming styles which are 2021). Consequently, the methodology relies on a flexible data
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 4 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
collection tool-i.e., semi-structured interviews-that enables the operation (Groumpos, 2010; Jones et al., 2011). Based on a
capture of the singularity of farmers’ beliefs. literature review, we selected a set of 37 factors in Canada and
39 factors in France that potentially affect investment decision-
The Sample making (Appendix 1). The factor labeled Farm Transfer was
The embeddedness of farmers’ decision-making in place drove included in both sets and aimed to shed light on the impacts of
the decision to conduct a comparative analysis, which enables the existence of an identified family member or non-family new
the discussion of the respective roles of social and environmental farmer to take over the farm. Although the high-level impacts of
contexts within which farmers navigate (Wolters and Steel, 2020). this factor have already been discussed in previous publications,
In this research, we compare two regions of a similar size that this article delves deeper in the dynamics of farm transfer in
are under strong urban-influence: the Ontario’s Greenbelt in peri-urban areas.
Canada under the urban influence of Metropolitan Toronto and For this study, investment was defined as a structural
the Toulouse InterSCoT1 in France under the influence of the city investment that is amortized over at least 15 years, such as
of Toulouse. Both areas are characterized by a variety of farming investment in land, in a combined harvester, in a building such
styles, including cash-crop farms, animal farms, and horticulture as a stable, or simply starting a farm operation. Although we
farms, while urbanization grows steadily due to demographic focused on the structural characteristics of farm operations, the
growth (Akimowicz et al., 2020). Furthermore, although Toronto sample included a diversity of activities ranging from annual
is a far more populated metropolitan area than Toulouse, land to perennial crop farming as well as diverse types of animal
consumption from which conflicts between farmers and non- husbandry, from cattle to turkeys. Such investments affect farm
farmers may arise remains comparable. financial status over a long period of time and can be considered
Within each research area, we selected a purposive sample as structural investments. In Canada, we further tailored the set
of 21 farmers in Canada (C) and 20 in France (F) to cover of factors as well as their labeling during a focus group with
the diversity of farming styles in each research area. More agricultural experts. As a result, the set of indicators used in
details about the characteristics of the farm operations can be Canada and France is adapted to the local specificities of each
found in Akimowicz et al. (2016) for the Canadian sample and agricultural environment.
in Akimowicz and Képhaliacos (2018) for the French sample. Additionally, the mental modeling activity was used as a
We focused on three main farm types-i.e., cash-crop (CC), guide for semi-structured interviews; while farmers designed the
animal (A), and horticulture (H) farms-which cover the issues mental model of their investment decision-making, interviewers
commonly faced by peri-urban farmers. Approximately half of followed-up with questions to understand the meaning
interviewed farmers operated under a sole proprietor legal status associated with each causal relationship created by farmers.
while the other half operated under a collective legal status, be This way, the elicitation of farmers’ knowledge was directed by
it a partnership or a corporation. Cash-crop farmers tend to farmers and framed by researchers. The constant interaction
expand in size to generate scale economies while having both few of both interviewees and interviewers resulted in rich data that
opportunities to diversify on-farm income and difficulties when included, for each farmer, the mental model of their investment
moving machinery. Conversely, horticulture farmers tend to decision-making, the transcription of the interview, and the
have much smaller operations while having more opportunities responses to a questionnaire on the characteristics of the farm.
to diversify on-farm income. On their end, animal farmers This data was openly coded, which resulted in the identification
are usually confronted with recurrent conflicts due to animal of three themes: the mitigation of land expansion needs to
nuisances, such as odors, while having some opportunities to generate income, the design of farm projects embedded in a
diversify on-farm income. The sample, which reflects most issues family project, and the supportive role of well-aligned territorial
encountered by peri-urban farmers, was, therefore, expected to organizations. Figure 1 below showcases an example of a mental
reveal the diversity of beliefs associated with farm transfer. model collected during the interviews.
Data
Beliefs are a tacit form of knowledge that is not directly
observable (Del Corso et al., 2014). The data collection tool of RESULTS
mental mapping is commonly used to access tacit knowledge.
With mental mapping, researchers can access interviewees’ The results section explores, first, the fact that farm transfers may
beliefs that frame their worldviews and, therefore, the reasons be considered as patrimonial transfers; next, attention is paid
why interviewees behave the way they do (Carley and Palmquist, to the farmers’ view that taking over a farm operation implies
1992; Isaac et al., 2009). Indirectly, the elicitation of these balancing quality of life with sacrifices. These two sub-sections
personal beliefs can also reveal the perceived dynamics of a support the idea that farmers’ identities are connected to the
system without necessarily knowing the details underlying its activity of farming. The following sub-section confirms that peri-
urban farmers constantly attempt to navigate the uncertainties
1 InterSCoT is a French planning policy enacted by a group of municipalities.
of their productive environment with little flexibility; this
It aims to increase the cohesiveness of planning at the intermunicipal scale
through the definition of a shared strategy for waste management, biodiversity
constraint, as one can see in the last sub-section, may be lifted
conservation, transportation, and land use planning, among other issues and when the institutional environment is framed by a shared vision
responsibilities. SCoT stands for Scheme for Territorial Coherence. of the future among agricultural stakeholders.
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 5 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
FIGURE 1 | The investment decision-making mental model of Interviewee F-CC3 (Source: adapted from Akimowicz et al., 2020).
Transferring a Familial Patrimony to the costs of higher education, they also favor the early on-farm
For participating heirs, taking over the family farm is most often involvement of their children. Only 1/10 interviewees openly
an obvious choice. Among the family farm heirs, more than 3/4 shared their reluctance to pass on the family farm to their heirs
had taken over the family farm. There is a clear attachment to due to the harshness of a farmer’s life. In line with this perspective,
the farm and farmland, which constitutes a heritage to preserve 6 new farmers mentioned the desire to farm for the quality
and pass on. In this regard, farmers’ families remain an active of life from which they and their family would benefit, while
support system; while the older generation often maintains some acknowledging the difficulties.
sort of involvement on the farm, especially during work peaks,
siblings entitled to inherit land may facilitate farmland access. “They grew up with it, so it’s part of their lives. [. . . ] Neither of them
Interestingly, with the lengthening of life expectancy and the is able to predict the future and say yes, I want to live in F. [. . . ]
difficulty to plan retirement pensions, one interviewee mentioned We adopted a five-year-old, so he may be the most potential for the
considering passing on the farm directly to the grandchildren. farm but he has to learn discipline first”. C-CC2
This perspective is supported by the frequent mention of absentee
owners who rent farmland, a potential impediment for farmers
who seek to acquire land and an opportunity for those who In addition to family heritage and the passion for agriculture,
provide custom farm work. transferring the family farm to the next generation also includes
passing on situated/place-based knowledge. While technical
knowledge related to dealing with soil and climate conditions
“It’s not a land attachment; it’s an attachment to a family heritage. were most commonly cited, interviewees also mentioned some
[. . . ] There’s a pond. We go to the pond shore and it feels like being sort of social knowledge related to their embeddedness in a
in the middle of Gers. Have you seen the house as well? I’m 7th
community. For instance, the ability to access land appears
generation. Of course, there’s a visceral attachment.” F-CC1
to be related to farmers’ inclusion in local networks where
opportunities to acquire farmland are shared. In France, SAFER,
However, taking over the family farm is more than a commitment a private organization with a public mission to regulate farmland
to preserve a family heritage. Growing up on a farm is also transfers, seems to contribute to the transparency of the farmland
perceived by all interviewees as a unique experience that has led market; however, almost all the French farmers interviewed
them to love farming and motivated them to start farming. Older complained about the increased competition for land access
farmers often explained that they let their children choose their among farmers resulting from SAFER action while 5 openly
own careers; while these farmers expect to contribute financially criticized SAFER’s decisions in strongly urban-influenced areas
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 6 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
when farmland is left to developers. Additionally, the importance mechanized tasks, such as tilling, harvesting, and spreading
of these networks is highlighted by the commitment of almost 1/4 manure and pesticides, during times when this will not bother
of interviewees to political or farmers union responsibilities. nearby non-farming residents. Traffic is another issue for
interviewees who farm plots that must be accessed through
“I’m not a farmer’s daughter [. . . ]. I’m not a local [. . . ] and one does municipal roads that are not designed for the movement of
not trust someone that just settled in. [. . . ] On the other hand, the heavy machinery. A clear distinction exists among the three
municipal council of B. helped me a lot [. . . ] since they were looking types of farmers interviewed: while the cash-croppers appeared
for new farmers and a municipal councillor came to me.” F-A2 to be the most affected by complaints about practices and the
urban environment, the horticulture farmers where the only ones
Balancing Quality of Life and Sacrifices to complain about property trespassing. On their end, animal
Although all the interviewees mentioned the difficulties of a farmers stood somewhere in the middle; most of them rely on
farmer’s life, most interviewees also shared that they enjoy their custom farm work for crop production, which both reduces their
profession since they do something they choose to do and which investment level and potential conflictual relationships.
they like doing. For those, there is nothing comparable to getting
up early in the morning or coming home late at night for a job “Farming last fall was bad. We were farming late at night. We are
they have always wanted to do. However, all the interviewees not looking to antagonize or looking at making the issue worse. But
at the same time, we do what we have to do and we are always
also recognized their profession is a true commitment; work
wondering if somebody is gonna call or say something.” C-CC2
hours are more than regulated employees’ working time, salary
barely reaches minimum wages at least during the first years
and most depend on their spouse’s income, vacations are rare Adapting to Uncertainties With Little
(only 1 to 2 weeks during off-peak work periods), and their work Flexibility
is commonly criticized by non-farmers. Regardless, for them, For all interviewees (except F-V6 and her permaculture farming
farming is a passion, a part of their identity. In this regard, farm system that relies on less land), the initial investment is a
intergenerational transfer is often a critical time for modifying financial burden that locks the farm on a path from which it
farming systems and adapting it to the new farmers’ perspectives. is difficult to deviate. One can distinguish the case of farmers’
heirs, who usually start with some land and farm equipment,
“Like she [his daughter] has her bakery and J. [his son] is gonna do from the case of new farmers, who have to invest in both
the goats, and he’s actually gonna start bee keeping. So, one thing land and equipment. This initial step is a major constraint for
I see, if there is a business to be added to the farm without taking new farmers who commit most of their financial resources,
anymore land. . . You know what I mean?” C-A4 which leaves them vulnerable to adverse events. In France, only
cash-croppers sometimes invest in crop insurance (while crop
They also recognized that they have to make permanent sacrifices insurance is commonly adopted in Canada) and, those who had,
to maintain the viability of their farm through continuous had criticized the damage evaluation criteria. New cash-croppers
investment. Although the priority is to invest so as to improve also rarely have the opportunity to store their first harvest due
economic results, 15 interviewees mentioned that investment to cashflow constraints. For other farmers, the lack of insurance
can also simplify farm work (especially cash-croppers who seek is barely compensated by fewer cashflow constraints due to less
a faster turnaround for their large holdings), which they will seasonal production.
consider when they can afford it, given the positive impacts on
health and family life. Inheriting the family farm is an additional “In any case, we have to invest regularly in order to renew the
constraint that requires the maintenance of the family property. equipment at the end of its life. So, we don’t have much choice. [. . . ]
Only F-H6, who converted to permaculture, openly opposed this Over these last few years, commodity prices have been really on the
perspective; she considers that her main task as a farmer is to low end, and investments are all the more difficult.” F-CC3
maintain soil health through her own hand labor, rather than
through the use of heavy machinery. To some extent, F-A2, who Strong differences exist across farm types. On the one hand,
mentioned that soil health is a question of organic matter, had a cash-croppers invested with confidence seeking investment
relatively close perspective. opportunities and still invest when necessary. They also
invested without overly considering credit rates, especially when
“It [quality of life] is important. Since I’ve been farming, I’ve seen investment was land related. On the other hand, horticulture
that health is fragile. I’ve tried not to damage it too much. [. . . ] farmers are more cautious when investing and shared that
Quality of life is important because if I’m sick, I cannot work. [. . . ] they have more difficulties with banks in obtaining credit lines.
I’ve changed; I’ve aged a little; I feel exhausted. Working outside, it However, horticulture farmers are also the most creative in
damages health a bit.” F-H5 accessing funding. For instance, C-V7 relied on community
support via a sort of crowd funding to invest in a farm in
Farming constraints are exacerbated in peri-urban areas. The exchange for opening the farm on the week-ends for community
proximity to non-farming residents, who may complain about activities. F-A2 benefited from the support of the municipal
noise and odors, can complicate farm management activities. council to access land next to her farm in exchange for
Consequently, most interviewees shared that they try to conduct maintenance. Last but not least, economic support from the rest
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 7 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
of the family, especially partners, may also be key at this stage of the point. They see figures, sit in their office. They never came to the
the farm transfer for those with little equity. farm. If there was a relationship, they would understand.” F-V3
“We’ve been married 26 years and he’s always done that [working Last but not least, market access also appears as a source of
off the farm in winter]. And it’s always given us the extras; like, rigidity when starting a farm operation in peri-urban areas.
it’s given us our fifth wheel or bonus pool when we have one. If we All participants have developed activities that enable them to
needed a new washroom or dryer, the off-farm income would cover capture more added-value; while some explore niche markets
that, the extras.” C-V1 (e.g., corn for popcorn, organic farming, seed farming), on-
farm income diversification such as processing (e.g., ice-creams,
soups) and agri-tourism (e.g., agricultural training, farm visits),
Institutional Lock-In
others rely on off-farm incomes. One out of 10 shared that they
Overall, participants described a situation where new farmers,
are considering moving to less urban-influenced areas where
overall, face three difficulties when defining their agricultural
investment and production costs are lower. Indeed, market prices
projects: access to land, credit, and market. In peri-urban areas,
are not sensitive to production conditions. While these ad-hoc
access to land is conflictual due to strong competition among
solutions currently enable participants to cover their production
farmers and also with non-farming stakeholders. Participants
costs, it is unclear whether the multiplication of similar farm
who farm land in flood zones or in ecological reserves sounded
projects and the integration of niche markets will guarantee that
more confident about the future viability of the farm. On the
farmers can cover their production costs in the future.
other hand, participants who farm land that is vulnerable to
development are more cautious, especially those with smaller
“That’s why we do farmers’ markets. That’s why I do my grass-fed
farms who rent land and can neither afford to lose plots nor
beef [. . . ] All the things that we’ve added are for getting a better
buy any. On their end, larger landlords commonly shared that
price for your product. So, like the grass-fed beef, you know, I can
the sale of a piece of land for development may help overcome charge what a fancy butcher shop would charge, because it’s very
unforeseen adverse events or fund their retirement pension. local.” C-A3
While the mission of SAFER is well-recognized and solicited
among participants, complaints were raised due to an increasing
number of land-allocation decisions that did not meet their DISCUSSION
expectations as urban influences increase. Planning policies,
The results validate the three hypotheses that framed this
such as Ontario’s Greenbelt, are also raising concerns about
research study. First, the high level of uncertainty surrounding
potential changes.
the decision to start farming slows down the intergenerational
transfer of farm operations in peri-urban areas. More specifically,
“I’ve heard there’s a lot of pressure from the development the difficulty to generate a decent income, reimburse debts, and
community on the [Provincial] Government to change [Ontario’s plan for retirement without selling farmland for development
Greenbelt border] and with the review I don’t know if that’s gonna
lengthens the career of current farmers and discourages new
. . . they say they are not gonna make it smaller but you never
farmers to start farming. Moreover, a trend toward an assessment
know.” C-A1
of farmers’ solvability through the assessment of collateral rather
than farm profitability seems to exacerbate this dynamic. In other
Access to credit is another issue for new farmers. Those words, the current unfair ability to access land, money, and
farmers with capital-intensive farming systems appear more market shape farmers’ investment decisions. Second, farmers rely
easily supported by banks and other economic stakeholders when on beliefs that enable them to anticipate the future outcomes
investing. Both the experiences of F-H4, who grows tomatoes of present decisions in order to decide to take over or transfer
hydroponically in digitally-controlled greenhouses, had no major farm operations. To begin farming is indeed a decision framed
difficulty in accessing credit and land, and the experiences of F- by past experiences and values that shape the entire life of
CC4, who included intensive vegetable production on his farm new farmers. For them, farm projects are one part of a way
as he had issues in accessing land because he had started cash- of life that reflects their identity and impacts their mental
cropping on a smaller than average farm according to SAFER health (Bondy and Cole, 2020); the restrictions that affect the
standards, tend to support this perspective. Despite sunk costs, implementation of farm projects may partly explain the shortage
access to credit seems more influenced by available collateral, of agricultural vocations. Third, farmers are embedded in an
especially land, than by the expected profitability of the farm institutional environment that may be more supportive of farm
operation. In this context, French cash-croppers seem to benefit transfer through well-aligned regional and farmers’ goals. More
from an additional advantage over smaller farmers due to the specifically, farm projects are framed by beliefs that tend to
financial support of the Common Agricultural Policy, which, align, more or less, with the beliefs of organizations in charge
in this perspective, may be understood as a rent that pays for of facilitating access to land, credit, and market: the better the
the investment. alignment, the easier the process to take over a farm. A rigid
institutional environment characterized by a poor alignment of
“One has to fight. It is exhausting in the long run. One thinks of farmers’ and regional organizations’ beliefs further slows the
starting a business, a farm operation and they [bankers] are missing adaptation of food systems to changing territorial conditions.
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 8 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
There is thus a planning opportunity to design food systems
that are more inclusive of new farmers’ projects and agricultural
systems (Macdonald et al., 2020; Hammelman et al., 2021).
These farm transmission dynamics appear to be slowed by
an institutional framework where land access, credit access,
and market access are tightly intertwined, and are prone to
heterogeneous and unequal access given farm and farmers
characteristics. In the French Toulouse InterSCoT, these three
aspects of a farm project are controlled by a set of organizations
that have long been involved in the governance of the farming
sector-e.g., the SAFER, the Crédit Agricole, the supply chains,
and the Agricultural Chamber (Akimowicz and Képhaliacos,
2018). Their proximity has resulted in the emergence of habits,
materialized through, for instance, a farm viability evaluation
tool that poorly grasps the complexity of farm systems based
on non-agricultural income diversification strategies, which are
contested nowadays. In Ontario’s Greenbelt, the absence of
any SAFER-like agency has been counter-balanced by zoning
policies and regulations, which have sometimes also contributed
to slowing farm structural adjustment (Akimowicz et al., 2016).
The emergence of new public and collective stakeholders may FIGURE 2 | The money-land-market nexus locking-in the agricultural sector.
contribute to unlocking this land-money-market nexus that
currently contributes to maintaining the dominant model of
capital-intensive agriculture described by Allaire and Boyer
(1995). This dominant model, which has thrived under the threatens farming, while political decision-making may result in
above-mentioned nexus (Figure 2 below), appears to foster regulation revisions that can impact farming practices. This social
unequal access to land, money, and market. These results uncertainty, resulting from social actors’ interactions, opens the
align well, for instance, with Erwin’s et al. (Erwin et al., door for a deeper investigation of psychological phenomena in
2021) findings that the utilization of the intersectionality economic analyses, such as Keynes’ Animal Spirits (Dostaller
framework helps to understand power relationships that frame and Maris, 2009), which may shed light on the rationality that
the agricultural sector. In this perspective, results first confirm underlies the practices implemented by the nexus stakeholders.
that traditional factors of intersectionality, such as gender This research is based on 41 interviews selected to represent
and age, foster prejudice when assessing the credibility of the diversity of situations when making structural investments.
new farmers’ farm projects. Further, farmers tend to be Three types of farm operations were selected, namely cash-
discriminated against based on the characteristics of their farm crop, animal, and horticulture farms. Future investigations
project, such as the farm type of their agricultural project, could pay more attention to other farm types that tend to
available equity, land ownership, and worldviews framing develop in peri-urban areas, such as horse farms and bee yards.
agricultural practices, as well as social characteristics such as These results could also be refined by the adoption of a more
whether one has inherited a farm operation. These factors, dynamic view that would better take into account innovation
which operate as exclusionary characteristics that prevent some and its impact on profits (Menna and Walsh, 2020). The
farm projects to take shape, may be interpreted as factors analysis of farm intergenerational transfers may also benefit from
of an agricultural intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991). The deeper attention to collective legal statuses, especially corporate
intervention of community stakeholders-e.g., public agencies, statuses (Purseigle et al., 2017). Indeed, the consolidation of
collective organizations such as cooperatives, and associations- large individually-owned farm operations is problematic when
may contribute to alleviating farmers’ access constraints to land, passing on farm operations due to high initial investment
money, and market, and may foster the design of more inclusive costs for new farmers. In France, this often leads SAFER to
food systems. Interestingly, farmers can play an active role in dismantle large holdings and arbitrate between farmers who
designing this supportive institutional environment (Ngo and are interested in acquiring land, which, as we have seen,
Brklacich, 2014). can lead to misunderstandings between stakeholders. On the
Finally, the theoretical framework, based on institutional other hand, collective legal statuses may be supportive of farm
economics, used in this research provides a relevant framework transfer processes through shared ownership of farm operations.
to analyze cognitive phenomena that frame economic decisions. However, these legal statuses may require additional regulations
In this research, we focused on the role of beliefs, which provide since farm share transactions are currently poorly regulated,
a background knowledge that farmers can use to navigate the which may result in land grabbing risks and a loss of sovereignty
uncertainties of their environment. This choice was adapted on land use issues. This also raises the issue of the involvement
to the peri-urban farming context where land access issues of other actors in land access and farm transmission, such as
resulting from landlords’ decisions to rent out or sell farmland public agencies, collective organizations such as cooperatives,
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 9 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638Akimowicz et al. Toward Agricultural Intersectionality?
and associations. In this regard, Canadian land trusts (Bunce for the implementation of transformative solutions stemming
and Aslam, 2016) and the French association Terre de Liens from participatory processes (Cadieux et al., 2013; Calvário
(Lombard and Baysse-Lainé, 2019) are examples of initiatives and Kallis, 2017; Anderson et al., 2020). The leadership
that may rejuvenate farm transmission dynamics. of local stakeholders-public agencies, collective organizations
such as cooperatives, and citizen associations-is key for
CONCLUSION the design of more flexible governance. Their initiatives to
facilitate farmers’ access to land, money, and markets can
The results show that farmers rely on internalized beliefs to contribute to improving farmers’ autonomous decision-making,
navigate the uncertainties of their production; these beliefs increase their ability to embrace the future, and foster the
contribute to planning their investment decisions, especially transition toward more inclusive food systems respectful of the
when starting farming. The results highlight the positive role global health.
of the institutional context when farmers’ beliefs and the beliefs
shaping their institutional environment, including their family, DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
their professional community, and the surrounding stakeholders
such as agricultural organizations, public agencies, and residents The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will
of the area, are well-aligned and result in a shared vision of be made available by the authors according to the ethics
the future in line with Cadieux et al. (2013). The specialization requirements applicable to the MARSUPIA Project.
of farm operations has led to the emergence of a variety of
agricultural visions, where encounters may overlap to some
ETHICS STATEMENT
extent and result in conflicts. While most farmers advocate
for the coexistence of diverse agricultural visions, the existence The studies involving human participants were reviewed and
of an institutional environment that regulates access to land, approved by the University of Guelph Research Ethics Board. The
money, and market in favor of the dominant capital-intensive patients/participants provided their written informed consent to
model of agriculture, described by Allaire and Boyer (1995), is participate in this study.
detrimental for those new farmers who attempt to design farming
systems that match their values. In this research, new farmers
are generally driven by an ambition to design alternative, more AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
sustainable farm projects, which do not align necessarily with the
MA led the research and authored the manuscript. KL, CK,
dominant capital-intensive farming model; these farmers share
and HC supervised the research and co-authored the article.
the feeling of being excluded. Meeting a certain quality of life
All authors contributed to the article and approved the
requirement is a common issue for participants who highlighted
submitted version.
the need for social relationships, be they with other farmers, or
with consumers and tourists coming to the farm.
Farm intergenerational transfer and the lack of new farmers FUNDING
ready to take over farm operations are not only economic issues
but also social issues. The inequalities framing the farm start The MARSUPIA project was funded by the European
process are detrimental to the renewal of farmers, especially Commission’ Research Executive Agency (Grant Marie Curie –
those with more sustainable farm projects that can foster IOF 622830). We are grateful for the financial support granted
healthier societies (Duru and Le Bras, 2020). The intersectional by IEP Toulouse.
barriers that have been highlighted in this research deserve
more attention. In particular, the private ownership of farm ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
assets restricts the farm start process and impacts, as well,
collective organizations such as cooperatives where equipment The authors like to thank all the participants, and especially the
is shared (e.g., French CUMA). There is a political space interviewees, for their time and commitment.
REFERENCES agricole dans l’InterSCoT toulousain. Econ. Rural. 365, 27–47.
doi: 10.4000/economierurale.5851
Agreste (2020). Graph’Agri 2020. Paris: Ministère de l’Agriculture et Akimowicz, M., Képhaliacos, C., Landman, K., and Cummings, H. (2020).
de l’Alimentation. Planning for the future? The emergence of shared visions for agriculture in
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. the urban-influenced Ontario’s Greenbelt, Canada, and Toulouse InterSCoT,
Process. 50, 179–211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T France. Reg. Environ. Change 20 :57. doi: 10.1007/s10113-020-01635-4
Akimowicz, M., Cummings, H., and Landman, K. (2016). Green lights Akimowicz, M., Magrini, M.-B., Ridier, A., Bergez, J. E., and Requier-
in the Greenbelt? A qualitative analysis of farm investment decision- Desjardins, D. (2013). What influences farm size growth? An illustration in
making in peri-urban Southern Ontario. Land Use Pol. 55, 24–36. Southwestern France. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Pol. 35, 242–269. doi: 10.1093/aepp/
doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.03.024 ppt008
Akimowicz, M., and Képhaliacos, C. (2018). Coordonner la construction Allaire, G., and Boyer, R. (1995). La grande transformation de l’agriculture : lectures
territoriale par une vision du futur. Les dynamiques d’investissement conventionnalistes et régulationnistes. Paris: Quae.
Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems | www.frontiersin.org 10 January 2022 | Volume 5 | Article 759638You can also read
